2005 Rules : NASA Supplied Dyno

[Jim P.]

No, we haven't established such a consensus. Todd Covini posted that he thinks the racer should pay for a NASA mandated dyno pull, I disagree entirely.

 

I believe that the racer should pay for the one mandatory annual dyno pull as per the series rules - AND - any dyno pull where they are deemed illegal - otherwise whoever initiates the 'protest' be it a racer or a NASA official should pay for the dyno pull and a protest fee should the racer be determined to be legal.

 

Kind of a "put up or shut up" rule, keeps racers from complaining that no one is ever dynoed or that NASA officials are 'favoring' certain drivers.

[95CobraR]

I am going to go with Jim. I think a protest fee is a good solution. You think someone is cheating? You put up $250. If he fails, the cheater pays you $250 (and you get your $250 back, also) and is disqualified. If he passes, he gets to keep your protest fee. The "winner" of the protest would also pay for the dyno run.

 

I've been around racing for a long time. It always becomes obvious when someone is cheating in a spec class.

 

NASA has added this simple approach (the 9:5 to 1) in order to create a class that allows the better driver and prepared car to compete on a mostly level field. SCCA has struggled for years and has come up with a much more complex (and unsuccessful) method(s).

 

IMO, to suggest NASA would pay for the dyno doesn't make sense. They would have to pass the costs to someone. Unless a dyno manufacturer could be talked into donating the machine, the promoter can not be expected to pay out of his pocket. You want NASA hdq's to pay? They'll have to raise dues to cover it. Since I run AIX, I don't want to pay for dyno runs in AI. I've always found that increased costs always trickle down to the racer (who is already out of racing funds).

 

You have an option. You can just run in AIX.

 

Doc

Atlanta

[Admiral]

I'm not sure why this always gets confusing.

 

1.) There is ALREADY a protest method in place. If a COMPETITOR wants to protest someone's motor, they put up the $100 and then if the protested car is under - protestor pays; if the protested car is over, protested car driver pays. This is in place, hasn't changed, still an option to participants in AI.

 

2.) NASA mandates a "random" compliance check. This was done in my region, I had to pay for the dyno fees EVEN THOUGH MY MOTOR WAS COMPLIANT.

 

My discussion surrounds situation #2, I don't think I should have to pay for it.

[mwilson7]

Mike,

 

I believe that NASA would be considered the protestor so they should pay the fee.

 

Perhaps this is an area that needs to be spelled out.

[swhiteh3]

Your solution doesn't fix the problem but its trying to get around it..

Mark, unfortunately, the "problem", as I believe you see it, is dyno variability. Solving this "problem" would take lots of time, money, development, and much much more. You'd essentially be tasked with building the perfect dyno.

 

I've worked in some of the most accurate and modern dyno facilities in the world. These dynos control many variables which a chassis dyno could never control - water temp, oil temp, air temp, humidity, and more. The chassis dynos eliminate such variables as trans temp, diff temp, or alternator load. The dynos can even monitor engine friction, to compensate for "wear in", or control barometric pressure.

 

Even in these multi-millon dollar engine dyno cells, there is variation. I'm not at liberty to talk about how much, but it's significant.

 

Correction factors attempt to correct for some of these things, but they are not always accurate. I don't believe the correction factor even takes into account humidity - only temp and barometric pressure.

 

Ask anyone running in a spec class if they would be willing to drive around with an additional just in case 150-200 lbs and see what the answer is.

If everyone in that spec class had to carry the same weight, then what would it matter? You guys in AI run Toyos, which are a relatively slow tire - and you don't mind. Because everyone is on even footing. Everyone in AI is resolved to run with the same dyno variation, and faces the same challenge of "how close to cut it".

I would MUCH rather have our cars dynoed at the beginning of the weekend and then sealed. Then if you (as a competitor) decide to make any changes and break any of the seals you leave yourself open to being re-dynoed.

There are plenty of ways to change power without breaking any of the 10 or 20 seals you might wanna put into place. If you honestly think that these seals are going to entirely eliminate changes, you're not very creative.

I WILL NOT allow what happened at Beaverun to happen to us again.

Then run with a nice big cushion, and it won't.

[nasaracer32]

First, every competitor has to provide a current copy of a dyno sheet for their car BEFORE the first race of the year. No exceptions. If you show up with a car but no sheet, maybe you can help out as a corner worker that weekend.

 

Second, NASA needs to be responsible for providing a dyno at the races. Like someone said, their series, their rules.... they bring the dyno. Reading this topic, a person would think that only AI guys use the dyno. There are other series there to help with costs and, IMHO, NASA regions could do a better job about advertising the dyno for the many students at the weekend, too. That would help with costs.

 

If NASA or an official wants a car dynoed, the NASA pays for it. I can't believe people even argue this point.

 

I do think that if person A wants person B to dyno and B is legal, then person A pays for the pull. However, if a lot of people say that person B needs to go on the dyno (say, 60% of the field agrees to it) then a NASA official, being in a leadership position, show make to call to have the car dynoed and NASA pays for it.

 

If person B's car ends up being illegal, reagardless of who asked for the dyno pull, then B has to pay for it.

 

Oh, and as far as a protest fee, I am against that UNLESS that money will go into a pot to somehow help the series (advertising, shirts??) or for prize money. It seems some regions claim to pay prize money at some events. Of course, there are other series out there that pay too, right, Jim?

[LMan]

Adding more cost for the racers doesn't seem right. It's a NASA series let NASA pay for the dyno.

 

You'll still get the cost.....in the form of higher entry fees, etc...NASA isn't going to shoulder that cost all on its own.

[LMan]

I can vouch that I know of one author for a popular magazine who has used my old car numerous times to 'prove' that a certain part was better than another - truth is - he simply manipulated the dyno results to prove what the vendor told him to prove in return for free parts.

 

are you serious? A popular auto magazine would do this to sell parts??? I can't believe it!

[trackboss]

I like Mark Wilson’s idea of getting the car dynoed say on Friday before the race weekend, with a NASA AI official present to record the results and seal various parts of the motor with lead ties like they do in WC, and setting it to whatever hp the owner wants then requiring the corresponding weight for the rest of the weekend. This makes it simpler for everyone and the only check required is the scales after the race. Very simple. There should be a limit on the dyno however so that those who choose to run different power numbers on different weekends can’t do all the tuning there so as to take away dyno time from everyone else. Say ½ hour per car. If you want to change tune around then you do it before hand on your own time and simply do the Friday dyno for check purposes only. Of course, as Scott W. pointed out there are ways of getting around this. I think there are ways of getting around everything. Having a knowledgeable official present to look over everything would definitely help.

[mwilson7]

I would MUCH rather have our cars dynoed at the beginning of the weekend and then sealed. Then if you (as a competitor) decide to make any changes and break any of the seals you leave yourself open to being re-dynoed.

There are plenty of ways to change power without breaking any of the 10 or 20 seals you might wanna put into place. If you honestly think that these seals are going to entirely eliminate changes, you're not very creative.

I WILL NOT allow what happened at Beaverun to happen to us again.

Then run with a nice big cushion, and it won't.

 

Scott - If you think that dynoing people on a dyno that varies with each run a few times a day is fair then please have at it. I will not participate in such a series because you then remove anything that resembles fun and replace it with nothing but stress.

 

If you think someone is cheating then protest them Scott, it's that simple. Sure there are a billion ways to cheat as as a Grand Am crew chief you know them all. It sounds like you are volunteering to be a tech inspector. Otherwise lets look at an actual way to make the weekends as stress free and fun as possible. Spending over 1 hour each day waiting for a worthless dyno run is not doing the series any good.

[Admiral]

Dyno on Friday? No way, day job won't allow it. I don't have time to haul my car to a dyno prior to a race. Besides, what good is that when someone could do what they want to the car overnight before the first race of the weekend?

 

The idea of sealing hoods and dyno'ing after the race weekend seems more logical to me. I just want NASA to pay for the dyno pull if I'm found legal.

[mwilson7]

NASA wants to dyno my car? Then NASA pays - PERIOD. I really don't understand how it could be otherwise or why they don't recognize that it is a major pain in the behind to have my hood sealed (can't work on the car), have to schedule a dyno pull with a NASA official present (that would be on a weekend because I have a day job), and go down and get it done (there goes some of my free time). I'm all for surprise inspections and dyno sessions, but if I'm legal on the dyno then get your money out and pay for the pulls.

 

 

And you said this as well? Which one is it then? How about allowing those of use who want to dyno friday dyno friday and those who want to have their car sealed and taken away have that option.

[Admiral]

Mark, I don't see a contradiction there. I can't do a Friday pull, so I have do to a dyno pull on a weekend. Still a major pain IMO for a random compliance check. My main issue being ordered to a post race dyno session and having to pay for the pulls even after being found legal.

 

WRT the Friday pull prior to a race weekend, I don't how that helps reach the goal of HP/TQ rule enforcement. The car gets dyno'd prior to the race weekend, the hood isn't sealed due to the fact that a driver needs to do maintenance to the car during a race weekend, etc. So now someone could drop the timing for a dyno session, then bump it back up and race. If there was doubt about the car being legal that same doubt could still remain after a Friday dyno session. I do understand how it might assist some racers who are close to the HP/TQ limit(s) get an idea of what their motor is doing "today" but then, as pointed out in other posts, it could change from day to day.

 

The sealing of the hood/computer, marking of the distributor and subsequently having the car report to a dyno (on a weekend in my case)gets the check done "post race" and hopefully "as raced".

[mwilson7]

What would you do if the race lives 200-300 miles from the closest NASA official like they do here in OH/IN?

[Admiral]

Good question and I don't have a good answer or suggestion. I would only offer that if someone is far away from a NASA Official in their region and a "monitored" dyno session is required, then some travel is involved for either the racer or the Official or both. Still, perhaps the post-race sealed hood/computer scenario might work until the car and Official can be brought back together at a dyno? Might be a week or two till it gets done, but it could be on a Saturday at a mutually convenient time or location (or at least the best available location/time)?

 

I guess I still want to ask "Why do we need all these dyno sessions?" to begin with. I don't run at the limit of the HP/TQ rule so it isn't something I have to manage closely. If a competitor suspects something, they need to file a protest per the existing procedure. This concept of "everyone on the dyno" or "top 3 to a dyno" when there is no dyno at that track weekend is where I get disconnected apparently. Are we needing some credibility injected into the results? I just don't feel we need additional dyno certifications during the season. Someone files a protest, then we need a dyno cert. Other than that the cars don't need to go to a dyno unless the car is changed and that is in the existing rules also. Maybe things are tighter in other Regions, maybe I'm just not familiar enough with how it is done elsewhere. Again, just my opinion/perspective.

[johnbasf]

I can't believe that you racers want to spend MORE money?? If I thought I was going to have to spend $100-$250 I would NEVER question another car for HP/TQ-WT. The more cars you get into AI the more NASA needs to supply the dyno. There are a lot of people doing this because they want to WIN races. The more people want to win the more people are going to FIND ways to win.

[gbrown8439]

The best way I see to prove a car is legal is to dyno after the race. If you dyno on Friday, people change things Saturday. We have over 100 dyno pulls on my car (a new Pauls Automotive Engineering record) and have never seen more than a 4 or 5 hp difference. Yes, if you are going to run close, you MUST get on the dyno before NASA puts you there to ensure you are legal! If you don't want to spend the money stay far away from the limit.

We spent the first half of the season hearing all of the rumors of how we had to be cheating and were thrilled when NASA finally brought a dyno so we could prove we were legal. I highly doubt if we will be back for another season of people sneaking around our cars with tape measures and telling others we must be cheating.

NASA must provide a dyno and scales if they want to run a series that is regulated by those numbers. If they can't provide them then they need to figure out a different way to regulate the series.

 

Greg Brown

OH/IN AI #7

[johnbasf]

Greg, you are so right. It had to feel good when you silenced you critics on the dyno. BTW I hope you return next year.

[Keith]

I will make one post on this rule discussion and only one.

 

First, the main enticement of AI for me was the hp/weight as a way to simplify the rules and keep rule distractions to a minimum.

 

Second, there is nothing wrong with the rule the way it is. Dyno and car variance is a fact of life. If you don't want to get DQ'ed, don't put yourself so close to the limit.

 

Third, I hear people throwing all kinds of numbers around about what sort of variance a dyno pull/car can have. If we want to learn what sort of variance can occur with one of these dynos, we should poll all NASA people (most series use these same machines) who GENUINELY didn't change anything between pulls (different days) and see what sort of variance is really happening. With this sample set, it would be easy to set your car to a safe level.

 

There is no other sensible way to handle a hp/weight specification without adding time, cost or both.

 

Finally, is you still think another racer is over on power, NASA has provided the protest as the avenue to resolve it.

[tacovini]

(I've been away from the board for a while and will be again until next week due to our season finale at Texas World Speedway this weekend.)

 

From my perspective, a lot of the proposed dyno related discussions run common to this thread, so I'll take another stab at clarifying my thoughts as a racer and a director, because I think it's important for many reasons.

 

Whether NASA supplies the dyno or not, the dyno test should be the SECONDARY means of enforcing the 9.5:1 rule. Scales need to be the PRIMARY means for simplicity reasons if nothing else. It's awesome that some regions have a dyno at the track and NASA takes care of it, but I think that should be the exception and not the norm. (Frankly, I'm happy we don't have a dyno at our Texas events.) Track dynos add cost, stress, workload, time, tension and a myriad of other distractions which get us too far away from the reason we do all this stuff...to race and have fun!!! (Cuts into BBQ time wayyy too much, too!)

 

Costs, politics and tension are a bad thing for the series, the racers and for NASA. I believe if we implement the "Decal Declaration" rule and openly post our #s on the windshield, the dyno simply becomes a verification that your HP/TQ is what you said it was. Competitor protests are always an option and can always be exercised by an individual to "put up or shut up" at any time. Full Disclosure and the risk of spot checks keeps everyone honest.

 

We've already determined that repeatability was a problem so for the dyno recert, I'd be comfortable with a +/- 10 units of HP or TQ during dyno recertification. This would be the acceptable range. Zero tolerance on the scales though.

 

Random/surprise engine sealing/dynos ensure windshield declarations are up to date and accurately declared by everyone. (Mark- Yes. If you change your HP/TQ between events, you have to be up-front, disclose and change your windshield declaration decals! The existing rule implies you're supposed to recertify your dyno anyway! Didn't change your windshield #s to reflect those new 75# injectors and .750 lift cam??? Guess what, you'll be DQ'd for the weekend if a random inspection finds your declared windshield HP/TQ to be outside the acceptable range. This lends more creedence to the primary enforcement tool...the scales.)

 

I'd propose that the 2005 rules state that each competitor is to dyno his car before the first event (not within 30 days of it BTW) AND should be expected to recertify his/her dyno up to 2 additional times during the season for series compliance reasons.

 

NASA shouldn't be considered a "protester" and follow the "protester protocol" to decide who pays for the dyno! NASA is assuring a level playing field for the racers, the spectators and most importantly, the rookies building cars so that everyone realizes that knowing your HP/TQ/WT is important and cheating isn't worthwhile.

 

When our Texas folks were recently sealed and req'd to recertify their dyno sheet at their own cost I had no doubt everyone would all be found legal. What was more important was that the backmarkers and incoming AI car builders who are closely following the series growth KNOW those folks weren't cheating and the rules are being enforced...and that is for the greater good of the series.

 

-= Todd

[racercosmo]

Todd, I do agree with most of your post. We have always had our cars on the dyno every few months to make sure things were going to be in spec. I don't think a random "everybody go to the dyno day" is uncalled for. The cars running out of my shop never have anything to hide.

On the other hand, there are expenses involved with loading a car on the trailer and taking a day from work to get the car checked, so if NASA wants cars on the dyno, NASA should pay.

[Admiral]

Well, the new 2005 rules say that NASA can mandate a dyno session, but still doesn't clear up WHO WILL PAY FOR IT and HOW MANY TIMES PER SEASON IT CAN HAPPEN!!

 

Did I miss something in the new document? How is this going to be handled?